H.U.D.A. vs JEEWAN ASHA GARG

The Supreme Court held that the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission's practice of granting uniform interest at 18% per annum is not sustainable and must be based on the specific facts of each case, as established in Ghaziabad Development Authority vs. Balbir Singh (2004) 5 SCC 65. The Court emphasized that compensation for mental agony or harassment must correlate with actual loss or injury, and the Commission must determine deficiency in service or misfeasance in public office. Consequently, the Court set aside the National Commission's order and directed that future awards must be justified based on the facts of each case.